January 2010

January 31, 2010

Warning: If you are a connoisseur of teas I strongly caution you against reading this post.

‘A cup of tea’ by Mayank Chhaya

Writer Alexander McCall Smith sees tea as an emblem of a refined culture.The ways he tells it in the Guardian one nearly experiences the aroma of a fine tea waft out of one’s laptop screen.

To me tea is just a utility drink. One drinks it more like the way one would scratch away an itch than to actually relish it. Come to think of it when you scratch a particularly strong itch, it can be delightful. Around 5 in the morning I draw water from the kitchen faucet in a cup, put two spoonfuls of sugar in it, and drown two tea bags with the ferocity of a Guantanamo guard waterboarding a terror suspect. Quite like the detainee it offers nothing of a lasting value.

As the traumatized cup comes out of the microwave oven after two minutes and fifteen seconds, one adds milk to turn the dark brew into a beige beverage. One stirs it for a few seconds causing several eddies in that narrow space. I do occasionally see boats bobbing up and down in those currents. A couple of minutes later all that remains of this “fine” drink is a dark brown sludge of sugar and milk fat on the inside edge of the cup. The rest has gone inside my stomach to be converted into acid that kicks up throughout the day.

The worst part of drinking tea is the aftertaste. For the past three and a half decades the aftertaste has made me wonder why I drink tea. It is perhaps because the act of waking up and making a cup of tea is a routine that anchors the rest of one’s day. It also keeps one rooted in the sheer banality of life.

January 30, 2010

In a rare literary inspiration I had described Apple’s iPad as an iPod with a hard-on minutes after the first video of the product went up on the company’s site. That description is shared more than I thought. Here is a picture from a spoof on ‘Hitler responds to the iPad’ which has become a YouTube sensation. “An oversized iPod touch!” says Hitler in the spoof.

This spoof may not seem humorous if you are German or German-speaking. The actual audio is from the movie ‘Downfall’, an excellent dramatization of Hitler’s final hours in his bunker.

January 29, 2010

This song from the movie ‘Ishqiya’ is gaining a lot of following these days. Composed by Vishal Bharadwaj, written by Gulzar and sung by Rahat Fateh Ali Khan, you will know when you hear it once why you would like to hear it again.

“Dil to bachcha hai ji, Thoda kachcha hai ji’ (Heart is like a child, it is a bit callow) is written to portray the feelings of a middle-aged conman, played by Naseeruddin Shah, who has fallen in love with a much younger woman (Vidya Balan).

For the benefit of some of my non-Indian readers (to the extent that I have any readers at all), Gulzar is the same poet and song writer whose “Jai ho” from ‘Slumdog Millionaire” won the Oscar last year.

Shah, who is widely regarded as one of India’s greatest actors of all time, shows you why it is so during the fleeting two seconds between 3.12 and 3.14 when Balan buries her face into his chest. Notice how Shah’s expression changes from joy to doubt.

January 28, 2010

It is hard to tell whether their accuracy is lost in the translation or not but it is always amusing to read the way China frames its public pronouncements on Tibet in general and the Dalai Lama in particular.

As the long-stalled talks between Beijing and the Dalai Lama’s special envoys begin, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Ma Zhaoxu has one piece of advice for the 75-year-old Tibetan leader: “We hope the Dalai Lama will cherish this opportunity and respond positively to the requests of the central government.”

The choice of the word “cherish” is unmistakably made to underscore the patronizing tone of the statement. It is almost as if a stern parent is telling an errant child after a timeout: “Now that you have learned your lesson, here, cherish this lollipop.” The idea that someone who has been forced to spend over five decades of his life away from homeland should be grateful that those who caused him to leave may occasionally condescend to talk to his representatives would have been amusing but for the underlying seriousness of the issue.

By its very definition people “cherish” things which are either rare or special or both. It is true that the talks between China and the Dalai Lama are rare, but whether they are special is a matter of opinion. For Beijing, the very fact that it deigns it fit to even engage him in a dialogue at all, even if it is about laying the groundwork for future dialogues, is special in itself. There is always a barely concealed dismissive tone when it has anything to say about the Dalai Lama and his efforts to reach out for a negotiated settlement.

When the talks broke down in November 2008, although there was no specific reason given there was a widely held belief that the Chinese government was unhappy at the Tibetan demand for autonomy and the accompanying assertion that it was not in conflict with the Chinese constitution. As always this time around too the Dalai Lama’s office is taking a tactful approach. His spokesman Tenzin Takhla was quoted as saying that the talks are an "important process of trying to find a mutually agreed solution."

Care was taken to point out by Beijing that the 10th round of talks since 2002 were sought by the Dalai Lama, lest it be misconstrued by anyone that China felt obliged to resume them. Beyond the finely tuned choreography of such talks, it is not known what the specific agenda of the latest talks is going to be.

There has been nothing to indicate that the Obama administration has specifically requested China to resume the dialogue. In what was widely seen as a move aimed at pleasing China President Barack Obama chose not to meet with the Dalai Lama weeks before his first state visit to Beijing in November last year. It was then believed that Washington could leverage this gesture to restart the dialogue between Beijing and the Dalai Lama.

A little over two months after that visit the resumption of the dialogue may in part be interpreted as a consequence of that. However, considering that the last nine rounds of talks in the last eight years ended without anything tangible being achieved, it is anybody’s guess what the tenth round could produce. One indication of how flippant the mood in China gets when it comes to Tibet and the Dalai Lama was a piece titled ‘A look at the Dalai Lama's ridiculous Indian heart’ in the People’s Daily Online on January 22. It was apparently prompted by some reports that the Dalai Lama might consider becoming an Indian citizen, something which has no official sanctity.

“According to reports January 16, 2010, during the opening ceremony of the International Buddhist Conference in Gujarat State, India, the Dalai Lama remarked that due to the fact that he was from purely Tibetan parents, he was Tibetan in appearance, but an Indian in spirituality. Thus, his comments and ideas originate from Indian traditions,” the site wrote.

“The Dalai Lama pleases his Indian masters not only by showing his willingness to be a "son of India," but also by effacing the originality of the Tibetan culture. The Dalai Lama uses such words to dwarf the rich Tibetan culture with distinctive local characteristics. He could not be more subservient. In fact, another reason why the Dalai Lama calls himself a "son of India" is that he intends to deny his Chinese citizenship,” it said.

January 27, 2010

iPad is an iPod with a hard-on. And you do not even have to call a doctor if the battery lasts more than four hours. I just saw the iPad video and I have to say Apple knows not just technology but aesthetics and how to combine the two and sex it all up.

I am yet to buy even an iPod. So I am not sure whether I will buy iPad any time soon, although at this point I am tempted to pluck it out of my drab laptop screen.

As Mumbai terror plot accused David Coleman Headley pleaded not-guilty during an arraignment in Chicago today, he could become the centerpiece of a debate on how to treat terror suspects in the United States.

Headley, who was presented before U.S. Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys this morning expectedly entered a plea of not guilty to all the 12 counts of indictment against him.

Just one day before the arraignment Former Bush White House Press Secretary Dana Perino used his case to challenge the Obama administration’s strategy to deal with such cases. The main point of contention of President Barack Obama’s detractors and critics is that in such cases it makes no sense to treat suspects as criminal defendants.

Citing the Obama administration’s supposed argument Perino and Bill Burck, a former federal prosecutor and deputy counsel to President Bush, wrote in the National Review Online: “Most recently, David Headley, who has been indicted in Chicago for helping plan the 2008 Mumbai attacks, has given us information of enormous intelligence value.”

The two then countered it saying: “So the Justice Department has cut a deal with Headley to get him to talk. It will be interesting to see how much prison time will be shaved off for his cooperation. We'll find out after he pleads guilty and is sentenced. Headley's deal might give us a preview of how much time the Justice Department is contemplating for Abdulmutallab: 50 years? 20? Two?”

The reference to Abdulmutallab is about Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the 23-year-old Nigerian who nearly blew up a Delta jet on December 25 flying in from Amsterdam.

Perino’s mention of Headley is part of a larger piece titled “Obfuscation after obfuscation” that wonders whether the Obama administration’s statement on Abdulmutallab’s interrogation hides more than it reveals. It is critical of its decision to treat Abdulmutallab as a criminal defendant “with Miranda rights, a decision we now know was made without consulting the intelligence services whose job it is to protect the country from attacks.”

The Indian Premier League (IPL), which owns and runs the exciting T20 version of cricket in South Asia, has been caught without an abdominal guard against a particularly vicious ball headed straight for you know what. After frothing a bit and folding up in a fetal position for a while, the IPL’s boss Lalit Modi has found enough composure to claim that there was no pressure on him from the Indian government against buying any Pakistani players during the just concluded auction.

The way the IPL works is that franchisees make bids for various cricketers from around the world during an actual auction. The players are bought for a season for a particular team for a price that the bidder considers worthwhile. The players from Pakistan, being the current T20 world champion, should logically have had no problem finding not just straight bids but even competing bids. Instead the auction failed to sell a single player, causing not just an affront to the country and its players, but also bringing into question the whole IPL. Allegations that the incendiary bilateral politics between India and Pakistan had subverted the spirit of a great sport with a near religious following in South Asia have refused to go away.

It is almost as if all the franchisees ganged up under an unseen hand to deliberately reject all Pakistani players. It is possible that the auction of the Pakistani players failed purely on commercial merit, which is ridiculous considering that by the current reckoning they constitute the best team. That left a lot of room for speculation. I do not for a second believe that the franchisee decision was entirely commercial. It was manifestly political and taken under subtle political pressure. They may have reasoned that since the presence of the Pakistani players would be fraught with political sensitivities, it may upend their return on investment. But make no mistake; it was a political decision in its primary motivation.

Now that a lot of Indians have reacted unfavorably to the biased auction, the IPL franchisees may be trying to backtrack and rectify the situation. Modi has indicated that there is still room for some Pakistani players to be bought in some teams. Actor Shah Rukh Khan, who owns one of the IPL teams, has said he would have liked to buy at least one Pakistani player but left it unsaid why he did not do so. That could mean only one thing—the franchisees were in concert in favor of the decision to ignore the Pakistanis altogether for reasons outside cricket.

January 26, 2010

One good thing about critiquing self is that one does not run the risk of a nasty rejoinder. I was on the Chicago Public Radio's 'Worldview' program hosted by Jerome McDonnell at noon today. The subject under discussion was the ongoing cases related to two separate terror plots that I have been covering for some of the Indian media outlets.

The first thing I notice about myself every time I am on the radio (and I have been on it quite a bit in the last two years) is that my voice loses its core. It sounds as if I am sitting inside a balloon that someone is pushing down a swimming pool. Also, I convey a sense of urgency in my voice which may not always be required.

On the substance of what I am saying I do not have much quarrel with, although early on in the interview I make a laughable mistake. While talking about David Coleman Headley, the main accused facing 12 counts of different charges, I speak of his divided sense of cultural loyalties. To underscore that point I mention about the belief that his eyes are of two different colors. Instead I say "the eyes of his color is also different." Of course what I should have said is the color of his eyes. Rather stupid. Being a compulsive deconstructionist it is only fair that I deconstruct myself.

Sanctimony is taught as part of global diplomacy around the world and India is no exception. The Indian High Commission in London is responding with righteous indignation to a BBC documentary about Mumbai’s slums.

The Indian Express newspaper has quoted an official at the high commission as saying this: "We thought it (the documentary) would be about the architecture of Mumbai but it was only about slums. He was showing dirty sewage and dead rats, children playing among rubbish and people living in these small rooms. He never talked about architecture at all."

Calling it “poverty porn” the official said, "We are upset. Many people know India but for people who don't travel, they will think all of India is like this. Of course it will affect our tourism. It is not representative at all."

The two-part documentary titled 'Grand Designs on Dharavi Slums in Mumbai' was made by Channel 4’s Kevin McCloud.

My takeaway from the official’s comments is that he is not upset that “dirty sewage (as opposed to clean sewage, I suppose) and dead rats, children playing among rubbish and people living in these small rooms” do indeed exist. He is upset that someone is actually showing that all those things exist.

The term “poverty porn” was bandied about soon after Danny Boyle’s ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ swept up every single cinema honor last year. The response to the movie among some sections of India was quite similar. The irony then was it was based on a book written by Vikas Swarup, who was once a diplomat based in that very high commission.

It is hard to comprehend this attitude where people do not get angry over the squalid life that tens of millions of people in Mumbai are forced to lead. However, they flare up if some outsider points it out.